My mistake, Weegie. I thought accepting cash for a UDID space could get you in trouble.
Obviously, having thought about it, there's no way Apple could ever really find that out though.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Evidence of Quad-Core Chips Shows Up in iOS 5.1 Betas
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My mistake, Weegie. I thought accepting cash for a UDID space could get you in trouble.
Obviously, having thought about it, there's no way Apple could ever really find that out though.
Now that's bold.
Apple creates a tablet PC. Others follow. - Apple was one of the last out there to come up with a tablet PC. Sony, Samsung, Toshiba, ASUS etc. they all had tablet PCs a few years before first iPad was released.
Apple creates a Mobile OS. Google follows. - Yeah. Let's all forget about Windows Mobile, Palm, RIM, Symbian etc. Apple was the first.
And as far as "expectations" are concerned, did you even check the subject of this thread?
----------
You know why all these companies used resistive touchscreens? Because capacitive screens for the phones were not developed yet. And this is the reason why initial Android interface was designed for resistive touchscreens. However, once the capacitive technology improved everyone switched to it (including Apple). You probably also think that Apple "invented" SSDs, dual core chips, IPS panels etc.
Apple was one of the ... iPad was released - you know what I mean, mate. The tablet PC as we know it. Not PCs in the form of a tablet.
Yeah. Let's all ... was the first. - yes, Apple was the first. Sure, there were other mobile OS', but we are talking here about operating systems specifically created for smartphones. Not dumbphones.
And yes, I checked the subject of the thread. It's all about some rumours. You are stating these rumours as facts: there is the difference.
Can't we go one thread without someone starting up yet another BS who copied who flamebait dorkspree hoedown extravaganza?
Would really need to know the Build number. Is it for the iPad or iPhone?
Personally I do not see a Quad in the iPhone 5 this fall. Unless there are some new Magical features/Apps that require it. Could be the need for the Aluminum Unibody that has been rumored. ARM or not, it would generate HEAT.
iPad Quad? Sure, and would turn it into an actual 100% Tablet PC.
I second that emotion.
As a user, I don't care who is "first", I care who is offering me a truly usable product.
Now that's bold.
Apple creates a tablet PC. Others follow. - Apple was one of the last out there to come up with a tablet PC. Sony, Samsung, Toshiba, ASUS etc. they all had tablet PCs a few years before first iPad was released.
Apple creates a Mobile OS. Google follows. - Yeah. Let's all forget about Windows Mobile, Palm, RIM, Symbian etc. Apple was the first.
And as far as "expectations" are concerned, did you even check the subject of this thread?
----------
You know why all these companies used resistive touchscreens? Because capacitive screens for the phones were not developed yet. And this is the reason why initial Android interface was designed for resistive touchscreens. However, once the capacitive technology improved everyone switched to it (including Apple). You probably also think that Apple "invented" SSDs, dual core chips, IPS panels etc.
after the iphone 3G blackberries lost all rights to be called smartphones
I guess someone can look at it this way.
The other way would be that components get better all the time (CPUs, GPUs, cameras, wireless technologies, etc) and because there's a lot of Android manufacturers, they happen to update their devices much more often and with a lot more devices than Apple, thus being first with the new components.
It doesn't mean "Apple is copying Android", at least as far as the hardware is concerned.
You know why all these companies used resistive touchscreens? Because capacitive screens for the phones were not developed yet. And this is the reason why initial Android interface was designed for resistive touchscreens. However, once the capacitive technology improved everyone switched to it (including Apple). You probably also think that Apple "invented" SSDs, dual core chips, IPS panels etc.
I never claimed Apple "invented" anything.
----------
As I said mate, there was a piece on here about it being a possible course of action by Apple, but it would be the guys who buy dev accounts then sell slots for $10 a piece who would get into bother. But nothing ever came of it.
----------
If only it were that easy ...
Last edited by a moderator:
No worries!
I am curious if Apple will increase the size of the quad core iPhone for a larger battery, or reduce the clock speed instead. I am also curious to know if Apple is going to debut the Cortex A15 as their quad core instead of the Cortex A9 that they are currently using.
I won't argue with anything on your list, though I would argue that it would be quite easy for someone with nothing but time on their hands to create a similar list of innovations from BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, or even iOS that have been integrated into Android, or other phone platforms.
Without competitive leaching of features from all platforms, there is no point in having multiple platforms to help the technologies advance. I don't want to live in a world with Android only, or iOS only handsets, because the push to innovate would be non-existant.
You do realize none of those listed "Android" stuff would have happened without the iPhone right ?
"* Android tablets get cameras - Apple follows"
That should read Apple makes tablet- Android follows. Etc.
Introducing better processors is no reason or excuse to maintain bloated or inefficient software.
MacBookPro13";14118883 said:
I don't think you guys are correct here.
It is core.x, not cores.x. The .x seems to be a reference to a specific core, especially since it is under the directory cores. Go to cores, which core? core.0, core.1, core.2 etc.
I'm not familiar with the language shown though, so this could be very wrong.
Surely if apple did quad core, it's because they optimized iOS and iOS apps to actually use it. But it doesn't really mean all that much more heat and energy due to power gating unused portions. It would also finish the same task faster, using energy for less time and creating heat for less time subsequently.
Yes, but given this assembly seems to be commented, I have to ask if their Objective C compiler would insert comments into the assembly? What purpose is there to look at the assembly if you are coding in Objective C?
Cheats is disingenuous. It does it by being designed smarter. Heterogeneous processing is the way of the future for mobile applications.
Last edited:
I do. I am on MacRumors forum - the place where many people believe that iPhone was the first smartphone out there.
No, because core.2 would refer to triple-core, which doesn't exist. It is either single core (core.0), dual-core (core.1), or quad-core (core.3).
The iPhone came out a year before the first Android smartphone.
In 2007, Apple Inc. introduced its first iPhone.
The Android operating system for smartphones was released in 2008.
Why do people get so hung up on "Improving an existing product vs. Innovating a new one"? (i.e. Who copied who and who "came up with" XYZ)
Why is there such a negative connatation with the former, Improving an existing product? Why do companies have to be "innovative" to be great?
Don't take my questions as me conceding that Apple is NOT an innovative company. Quite the contrary... I feel like thery are just as innovative as any other tech company one would label as such. Not to mention they bring in many other aspects of business that other companies fail to see or do not make a priority and this is why they have achieved a cult-like following. You can hate Apple all you want -- call them copiers, whatever... the fact is, when you look at the big picture, they're obviously doing something that other companies aren't. Be it creating something new, improving something existing, or my favorite -- taking an existing product and showing consumers how/why the NEED them in their lives!
Why is there such a negative connatation with the former, Improving an existing product? Why do companies have to be "innovative" to be great?
Don't take my questions as me conceding that Apple is NOT an innovative company. Quite the contrary... I feel like thery are just as innovative as any other tech company one would label as such. Not to mention they bring in many other aspects of business that other companies fail to see or do not make a priority and this is why they have achieved a cult-like following. You can hate Apple all you want -- call them copiers, whatever... the fact is, when you look at the big picture, they're obviously doing something that other companies aren't. Be it creating something new, improving something existing, or my favorite -- taking an existing product and showing consumers how/why the NEED them in their lives!
That's one of biggest BS I've read, even from you. Those are largely dictated by the component suppliers not by the OS. Do you say Samsung followed LG because LG released a dual core phone first? No, LG just happened to coincide to release the first phone when Tegra2 chips were becoming available to the phone makers.
As for the topic of quad core, it's actually pretty interesting because I thought Apple might stay dual core but instead go with faster A15 cores unlike nVidia who chose to release quad core early but with the common A9 cores. I wonder if they can do both at the same time?
A lot of work is presently under heavy development and testing for ARM's chipsets, OpenCL C99 and LLVM/Clang. LLVM/Clang 3.1 is going to be a beast leaving it clear that you will never touch GCC again, unless you're a GPLv3 zealot.